|
What do you believe? (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by floyd741
I am an Atheist. I believe that with the amount of scientific evidence (sure we don't have tons of evidence but it's way more than religion has or ever will have) we have now for the several theories of creation/evolution/etc. that it's absurd to believe in a god, afterlife, soul/spirit or whatever. |
Interesting... near as I recall science has no position on god, afterlife, soul or whatever. I really wish people would stop abusing science by trying to use it in support of things that are beyond it's scope. While there is no place for theology in science the two are not mutually exclusive. |
|
|
| floyd741 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
Interesting... near as I recall science has no position on god, afterlife, soul or whatever. I really wish people would stop abusing science by trying to use it in support of things that are beyond it's scope. While there is no place for theology in science the two are not mutually exclusive. |
I'm not sure what you mean by saying I'm using it to support those things but here's an example of what I was saying: If we have evidence that maybe the universe was formed by a "big bang" and that planet earth was formed after billions of years of debris collecting around a star then that contradicts the theory that God made everything (for which there is no evidence afaik). That's what I mean by "scientific evidence for the theories of creation/evolution/etc" |
|
|
| Capitalizt |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
I happily called myself an atheist for many years, and I only stopped arguing against religion because I became so utterly bored of it. So eat your ing words, dolt. |
You don't need to argue against religion. Just be accurate with your words. Theism refers to BELIEF in a "conventially defined" God or Gods. If you lack belief, you are by definition NOT a theist, hence an atheist.
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
I don't believe in any conventionally defined deity |
Pwnt bitch. |
|
|
| Lews |
| Actually it doesn't completely nullify it, and neither does evolution. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by floyd741
I'm not sure what you mean by saying I'm using it to stupport those things |
I took what you wrote to mean that given the present state of scientific discovery and theory it is folly to believe that any deity or non-observable state exists. My contention is that the study of the observable cannot have a position on what is not observable; subsequently, the present state of scientific discovery and theory has no impact on theology.
| quote: | | but here's an example of what I was saying: If we have evidence that maybe the universe was formed by a "big bang" and that planet earth was formed after billions of years of debris collecting around a star then that contradicts the theory that God made everything. |
How so? |
|
|
| Mr.Mystery |
| quote: | Originally posted by Capitalizt
Pwnt bitch. |
How about you try reading the entire sentence? |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by Capitalizt
You don't need to argue against religion. Just be accurate with your words. Theism refers to BELIEF in a "conventially defined" God or Gods. If you lack belief, you are by definition not a theist, hence an atheist. |
Cite proof that theism refers only to "conventionally defined" deities, please. Or do you assume Buddhists are atheists too? |
|
|
| floyd741 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
My contention is that the study of the observable cannot have a position on what is not observable
|
well... you got me there.
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
How so? |
If we have reason to believe in a specific origin of our universe that contradicts another theory on its origin, one of those theories has to be incorrect. I spoke to a priest once who told me that he believes in evolution and the big bang but that he also believes that god did all of those things. There wasn't much I could do to argue with that since he believes what I believe but only with a different cause. Even so, I don't think that god did any of that because the concept of god is, imo, logically impossible. Then again, the conept of the big bang is pretty far-fetched too but there are reasons to believe it happened: proof that planets/stars/etc. are moving away from each other which implies that they must have all come from one point.
I hope I answered your question somewhere in there, lol. |
|
|
| Cpt.Cocaine |
| quote: | Originally posted by floyd741
I hope I answered your question somewhere in there, lol. |
No, you kinda just proved his point that they're not contradictory. |
|
|
| Capitalizt |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
Cite proof that theism refers only to "conventionally defined" deities, please. Or do you assume Buddhists are atheists too? |
Theism is belief in a deity or deities. Do Buddhists believe in a deity? If not, they are not theists. Go by the dictionary definition buddy. Agnostic = lacking knowledge. The term is completely separate from the realm of belief or lack of belief. You can be an agnostic theist or an agnostic atheist. Strictly speaking everyone is an agnostic of what happened before the big bang. Nobody has that information (knowledge)..but if you choose to BELIEVE it was done by a sky fairy, you are an agnostic theist. If you lack belief in any sky fairy, you are an agnostic atheist. |
|
|
| bananas |
| quote: | Originally posted by Rostros
or maybe ask the local church group in Haiti if they still love God ? |
oh they do, 'they're lucky god saved them' |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by Capitalizt
Do Buddhists believe in a deity? If not, they are not theists. Go by the dictionary definition buddy. |
Unfortunately for you, complex philosophical terms and debates cannot be contained in a dictionary definition. Otherwise philosophy classes would be very short and very easy. Of course, you're a political dullard and it should be expected you can't think outside of simplistic, biased and binary false oppositions. You're also an idiot who leaps to false assumptions about how I'm "running away" from words I'm quite happy to use. Anyone on this forum will tell you I'm not afraid of being confrontational about what I believe in, so try taking your stereotypes out of your ass and engaging your brain.
The whole point of agnosticism is that ultimate answers about reality and spirituality are unknown or unknowable. Therefore, if you're agnostic it's impossible to believe in a specific sky fairy with any definable attributes, because that information is ing unknown.
Is that clear enough for you, or should I pull out the brightly coloured crayons and dumb it down some more? |
|
|
|
|
